RF Safe

Evaluating radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposure in confined spaces: a systematic review of recent studies and future directions

Radiation Protection Dosimetry · 2024 · Unclear · Insufficient evidence

← Research stream
UnclearInsufficient evidencePaper 153

This systematic review summarizes recent studies of RF-EMF exposure in confined environments, especially subterranean settings such as subways, tunnels, and mines. It reports that studies commonly assess exposure using electric field and specific absorption r…

Study snapshot

PublicationRadiation Protection Dosimetry · 2024
Study typesystematic_review
Reported directionUnclear
Evidence ratingInsufficient

Abstract

Evaluating radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposure in confined spaces: a systematic review of recent studies and future directions Ahsan Ashraf M, Celik T. Evaluating radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposure in confined spaces: a systematic review of recent studies and future directions. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2024 Apr 20;200(6):598-616. doi: 10.1093/rpd/ncae045. Abstract This study reviews recent research on Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Field (RF-EMF) exposure in confined environments, focusing on methodologies and parameters. Studies typically evaluate RF-EMF exposure using an electric field and specific absorption rate but fail to consider temperature rise in the tissues in confined environments. The study highlights the investigation of RF-EMF exposure in subterranean environments such as subways, tunnels and mines. Future research should evaluate the exposure of communication devices in such environments, considering the surrounding environment. Such studies will aid in understanding the risks and developing effective mitigation strategies to protect workers and the general public. Conclusion In this study, we conducted an SLR of 63 articles related to RF-EMF exposure in confined environments. The articles were selected based on a QA and divided into measurement and simulation studies. Our literature analysis demonstrates that RF-EMF exposure is higher in working spaces and transport than in dwellings, largely due to multiple exposure frequencies and excessive users. However, evaluating sub- terrain environments remains limited despite the growing use of wearable wireless devices in these settings. We also identified the different exposimeters and numerical dosimetry software tools commonly used for measuring and simulating RF-EMF exposure in confined environments. Furthermore, we found that the electric field is the most commonly investigated parameter for evaluating RF-EMF exposure using dosimetry simulation and measurement in confined environments. Given the increasing use of wearable wireless devices in sub-terrain and other occupational environments, there is a critical need to evaluate RF-EMF exposure in high-temperature environments, particularly with respect to temperature elevation in tissue. Future studies should evaluate the potential health impacts of long- term exposure to RF-EMF, especially in occupational settings where workers are exposed for extended periods. Open access paper: ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Machine Enhanced Logic

AI evidence extraction

Structured fields below were generated from the paper’s abstract and metadata to make the evidence easier to inspect. Automated extraction may be incomplete or incorrect; verify important details against the original paper.

Study typesystematic_review
Effect directionunclear
Populationworkers and the general public in confined/subterranean environments
Sample sizeNot supplied
ExposureRF
Evidence strengthInsufficientConfidence: 89% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

This systematic review summarizes recent studies of RF-EMF exposure in confined environments, especially subterranean settings such as subways, tunnels, and mines. It reports that studies commonly assess exposure using electric field and specific absorption rate, but generally do not consider tissue temperature rise in confined environments.

Outcomes measured

  • electric field
  • specific absorption rate
  • temperature rise in tissues
  • RF-EMF exposure in confined/subterranean environments

Limitations

  • Review abstract does not report quantitative pooled results
  • Existing studies are described as typically not considering temperature rise in tissues
  • Future research is needed on communication-device exposure in confined environments considering surrounding conditions
View raw extracted JSON
{
  "study_type": "systematic_review",
  "exposure": {
    "band": "RF",
    "source": "other",
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": null
  },
  "population": "workers and the general public in confined/subterranean environments",
  "sample_size": null,
  "outcomes": [
    "electric field",
    "specific absorption rate",
    "temperature rise in tissues",
    "RF-EMF exposure in confined/subterranean environments"
  ],
  "main_findings": "This systematic review summarizes recent studies of RF-EMF exposure in confined environments, especially subterranean settings such as subways, tunnels, and mines. It reports that studies commonly assess exposure using electric field and specific absorption rate, but generally do not consider tissue temperature rise in confined environments.",
  "effect_direction": "unclear",
  "limitations": [
    "Review abstract does not report quantitative pooled results",
    "Existing studies are described as typically not considering temperature rise in tissues",
    "Future research is needed on communication-device exposure in confined environments considering surrounding conditions"
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "insufficient",
  "confidence": 0.89,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "RF-EMF",
    "confined spaces",
    "subterranean environments",
    "subways",
    "tunnels",
    "mines",
    "electric field",
    "specific absorption rate",
    "temperature rise",
    "exposure assessment",
    "systematic review"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": [
    {
      "slug": "occupational-exposure",
      "weight": 0.74,
      "reason": "The review discusses subterranean environments including mines and mentions protecting workers."
    }
  ]
}
AI can be wrong. Always verify against the paper.

AI-extracted fields are generated from the abstract and metadata and may be incomplete or incorrect. This material is for informational purposes and is not medical advice.

Identifiers and source

DOI: 10.1093/rpd/ncae045
PubMed: Not supplied

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library